DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,809
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Aug 31, 2011 13:20:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nashvillehoyas on Aug 31, 2011 21:09:20 GMT -5
ULouisville is said to be one of several that will be considered as a replacement for A&M.... Fla St and possibly UOklahoma are prefered to join A&M in SEC. It is reported that the SEC would prefer a 16 team conference.
|
|
hoya95
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,445 
|
Post by hoya95 on Sept 1, 2011 8:04:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 1, 2011 11:34:23 GMT -5
Dan Jenkins on Texas: "They think they run the whole world, certainly they think they run the state, and all of college football." One thing is pretty clear: very few people will shed a tear if the Big 12 falls apart. "It was a TV deal," said Jenkins. online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904583204576542833386182742.html?mod=wsj_share_tweetI get "Saturday's America" off the shelf before every college football season. It was published in the 1970s, when Jenkins' beloved Southwest Conference was still highly relevant and Jenkins had very pleasant things to say about most of the Texas teams. Once the SWC broke up and Jenkins' TCU Horned Frogs were relegated to C-USA, he decided the Big 12 was an evil entity backed by politicians, greed, and television, and he's been telling that story to anyone who will listen for decades. It was a marriage of two regional conferences destined to die: the Big 8 and the Big 12. The SWC was already virtually dead: all of its members were Texas universities, and schools in a one-state conference couldn't compete with programs that embraced the new national scope of CFB. The Big 8 was comprised entirely of state schools in non-populous states which played respectable football: Colorado and Nebraska had recently won national championships. But the Big 8 didn't dominate the St. Louis television market, and Denver and Kansas City weren't enough. A deal was struck: access to Texas media markets and recruiting in exchange for membership in a traditional conference in the heartland. That deal, which was certainly not independently driven by the University of Texas, sounds suspiciously like the deal that A&M has just struck with the SEC. Things changed. As it became clear that some schools in the Big 12 conference had greater resources, revenues were distributed unevenly. As part of the deal that was struck last summer, Texas A&M was guaranteed more revenue than other schools. A Texas Monthly columnist (who I'm sure DFW will point out attended UT Law, even though he received his undergraduate degree from Rice, has written about rooting for Rice, and has never claimed to be partial to the Longhorns) posted the following on his blog yesterday: "I spoke with a friend yesterday who is knowledgeable about the situation at Texas A&M, and here is what he had to say...
The impetus for A&M to take action was UT’s decision to establish the Longhorn network in partnership with ESPN. “The regents went nuts,” my source told me. They were looking for some way to make a statement. “Look at what they have done for their brand,” my source told me.
A&M decided to “look at everything.” They brought in consultants. The move to the SEC was the answer. It would bring national exposure for the next ten to fifteen years. A&M would be on national television almost every week."
In other words, this move was driven, at least partially, by Texas A&M's own greed. It continues to baffle me that Texas sportswriters continue to march in lockstep on the "greedy Texas" story. Not that Texas isn't greedy, but it's certainly not the only school south of the Red River that is. |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 2, 2011 10:48:56 GMT -5
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Sept 2, 2011 11:17:37 GMT -5
I can't believe that a Longhorn/Aggie network would not tilt towards Texas. If you call it the Texas Network, who does that favor? On your previous post, I missed the logic. The justification is pretty much what the A&M grad in my office mentioned. Most of this seems like A&M getting theirs while they could - and, in an increasingly competitive college environment, that sounds more than reasonable. The "greedy Texas" thing isn't fair, but "flirty Texas" is - the 'Horns threatened to move to the Pac-whatever unless they were allowed to run the Longhorn Network. So discussions of A&M disloyalty come counter to the idea that Texas was disloyal first. |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 2, 2011 11:59:37 GMT -5
I can't believe that a Longhorn/Aggie network would not tilt towards Texas. If you call it the Texas Network, who does that favor? So call it the Texas College Sports Network. On your previous post, I missed the logic. The justification is pretty much what the A&M grad in my office mentioned. Most of this seems like A&M getting theirs while they could - and, in an increasingly competitive college environment, that sounds more than reasonable. The "greedy Texas" thing isn't fair, but "flirty Texas" is - the 'Horns threatened to move to the Pac-whatever unless they were allowed to run the Longhorn Network. So discussions of A&M disloyalty come counter to the idea that Texas was disloyal first. TAMU was also part of discussions with the Pac 10 and SEC last summer. By your logic, the Aggies are bigger tarts than the Longhorns. Also, I never accused any school of "disloyalty." The bottom line is that both schools are moving to "get theirs," as you say. You can call that greed or you can call it reasonableness, I suppose. The point is that both schools are engaging in similar behavior and have similar motives, but most reporters identify Texas as "greedy" and not TAMU. For the record, it is my opinion that this move will eventually be good for the state of Texas and Texas college football, and I hope the 'Horns and Aggies continue to play. My beef is not with A&M's decision, it's with the bitching of Aggie fans and poor reporting. |
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Sept 2, 2011 13:02:52 GMT -5
Eh, everyone's cranky on a Friday before a three-day weekend.
My biggest beef is with ESPN, who is quickly losing any semblance of objectivity. With their interest in the Longhorn Network, they can't report on the issue objectively.
I think that, when A&M is fighting greed and media bias, they really mean ESPN.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,809
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 2, 2011 13:25:43 GMT -5
My biggest beef is with ESPN, who is quickly losing any semblance of objectivity. With their interest in the Longhorn Network, they can't report on the issue objectively. Listening to ESPN talk about objectivity is about as likely as Vince McMahon talking objectively about the WWE. Both have a position of power within their respective industries where they really think resistance is futile and their leadership can be dictated in the marketplace. The latest example (about ESPN, that is): www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/sports/ncaafootball/feldman-embattled-writer-leaves-espn-for-cbs.html |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 2, 2011 14:00:16 GMT -5
Eh, everyone's cranky on a Friday before a three-day weekend. My biggest beef is with ESPN, who is quickly losing any semblance of objectivity. With their interest in the Longhorn Network, they can't report on the issue objectively. I think that, when A&M is fighting greed and media bias, they really mean ESPN. Can't disagree with this, and Texas aligning itself with ESPN has certainly not been a good move from a PR standpoint. Bruce Feldman is one of the best CFB writers on the planet. ESPN's CFB programming (on-screen and on the web) has been mostly abysmal over the past five years, with a few bright spots (Rece Davis and Ivan Maisel are the others that come to mind). One of the things I really like about Twitter is that it promotes quality journalism. Even if espn.com is the only sports site I log onto (it's not, but let's pretend), Feldman's articles will still show up in my Twitter feed, because they're great. As CBS, NBC, and even Yahoo! Sports expand their better-quality sports programming, ESPN may be primed for decline. ON EDIT: Speaking of the Longhorn Network... www.burntorangenation.com/2011/9/2/2400179/longhorn-network-failure-to-launch |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,809
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 6, 2011 22:47:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 7, 2011 9:47:35 GMT -5
"Conditional acceptance" from the SEC. The Aggies are not pleased with Baylor University this morning. The Bears, who have the most to lose from a Big 12 implosion, are considering litigation against the SEC and against Mike Slive personally, which could potentially blow this whole thing up (but probably not).
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Sept 7, 2011 11:27:46 GMT -5
My biggest beef is with ESPN, who is quickly losing any semblance of objectivity. With their interest in the Longhorn Network, they can't report on the issue objectively. Both have a position of power within their respective industries where they really think resistance is futile and their leadership can be dictated in the marketplace. The latest example (about ESPN, that is): www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/sports/ncaafootball/feldman-embattled-writer-leaves-espn-for-cbs.htmlVince McMahon is always straight with you. |
|
